Why 

Blame  the 


M 


ASONS  ? 


By 

Jay  MacEss 


THE  PAULIST  PRESS 

401  West  59th  Street 


New  York,  N.  Y. 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2016 


https://archive.org/details/whyblamemasonsOOmace 


Why  cBlame  the  Masons  ? 


By 

JAY  MacESS 


New  York 

THE  PAULIST  PRESS 
401  West  59th  Street 


J StfjU  #tmtat: 


Arthur  J.  Scanlan,  S.T.D., 
Censor  Librorum. 

imprimatur: 

+ Patrick  Cardinal  Hayes, 

Archbishop  of  New  York. 

New  York,  July  5,  1928. 

Copyright,  1928,  by  “The  Missionary  Society  of  St.  Paul  the 
Apostle  in  the  State  of  New  Yore.” 


WHY  BLAME  THE  MASONS? 

By  Jay  MacEss 

Who  started  it  all?  That’s  the  question. 

Here  in  this  country  American  Catholics  as  a 
general  rule,  live  in  perfect  peace  with  neighbors 
and  business  associates  who  are  Masons.  But 
every  now  and  again  a Catholic  plans  to  join  a 
Masonic  lodge,  or  a Mason  wishes  to  enter  the 
Catholic  Church,  or  a Catholic  girl  wants  to  marry 
a Mason,  or  a “Catholic  Mason”  dies  and  his 
family  goes  to  the  parish  priest  to  arrange  for  a 
funeral  Mass.  And  then,  the  trouble  begins. 

The  bride-elect,  the  prospective  Mason,  the 
would  be  Catholic  or  the  anxious  widow  imme- 
diately comes  into  collision  with 

A Hostile  Organization 

That  organization  is  the  Catholic  Church.  She 
declares  herself  the  irreconcilable  enemy  of  Mason- 
ry. Catholic  women  are  warned  not  to  marry 
Masons;  Catholic  men  are  told  not  to  join  the 
Masons;  lodge  members  desiring  to  enter  the 
Catholic  Church  are  instructed  to  abandon  Mason- 
ry; Catholics  who  have  joined  the  Masons  are  re- 
fused a Catholic  funeral.  To  the  average  citizen 
it  looks  like  wanton  aggression.  Why  should  there 
be  this  bitter  hostility  between  the  Catholic 
Church  and  Masonry? 


— 3 — 


WHY  BLAME  THE  MASONS? 


Who  Started  It  All? 

The  answer  of  the  average  man  to  the  above 
question  will  no  doubt  be  based  on  his  general  im- 
pressions. He  is  aware  that  the  Catholic  Church 
has  repeatedly  forbidden  her  children  to  become 
Masons.  He  probably  traces  this  prohibition  to 
some  unjustifiable  suspicion  in  the  minds  of  the 
Church  authorities,  or  to  some  vague  and  ancient 
dispute  that  has  no  practical  application  here  and 
now.  Or  he  may  believe  that  the  Catholic  Church  . 
has  been  nursing  a grudge  in  France  and  Italy  for 
several  generations  and  is  now  trying  to  take  it  out 
on  Masonry  in  the  United  States  of  America.  Thus 
it  seems  as  if  harmless  Masons  who,  like  good 
Americans,  try  to  live  on  friendly  terms  with  all 
their  neighbors,  are  being  subjected  to  an  unreason- 
able discrimination. 

Naturally  the  Masons  feel  bewildered.  They 
are 

Free,  White  and  Twenty-One 

If  they  are  eligible  bachelors  why  can’t  they  marry 
Catholic  girls?  Why  can’t  they  join  the  Catholic 
Church,  if  they  so  desire?  Why  can’t  they  invite 
their  Catholic  friends  to  join  the  Lodge?  And 
why  can’t  those  friends  be  buried  from  a Catholic 
Church  after  death?  The  apparent  answer  to  all 
these  questions  is:  Because  Catholic  ecclesiastical 
authorities  are  intolerant.  It  looks  like  another 


— 4 — 


WHY  BLAME  THE  MASONS? 


proof  that  the  Catholic  people  are  priest-ridden 
and  that  their  leaders  are  petty  tyrants,  unfa- 
miliar with  American  conditions. 

Before  going  any  further,  however,  it  will  be 
wise  to  take  a glance  at  the  Church’s  official 
actions  and  see  whether  or  not  they  are  really  as 
represented. 

Here  Are  the  Facts 

Eight  different  Popes,  in  seventeen  different 
pronouncements,  and  at  least  six  different  local 
councils  in  North  America,  have  fulminated  against 
Masonry. 

The  earliest  condemnation  of  secret  societies 
by  the  Church  took  place  190  years  ago,  just 
twenty-one  years  after  the  organization  of  the  first 
Grand  Lodge.  From  that  date  to  this,  as  noted 
above,  the  ecclesiastical  authorities  have  repeatedly 
condemned  the  Masons  and  similar  secret  organiza- 
tions. The  condemnation  of  1738  mentioned  spe- 
cifically only  the  Masons  and  the  Carbonari,  but  in 
1894,  to  the  list  of  societies  forbidden  by  name, 
were  added  the  Odd  Fellows,  the  Sons  of  Temper- 
ance, and  the  Knights  of  Pythias. 

Catholic  Bishops  and  pastors  have  given  pre- 
cise instructions  on  the  attitude  to  be  assumed 
toward  these  associations.  The  Catholic  people 
are  warned 


— 5 — 


WHY  BLAME  THE  MASONS? 


Not  to  Join 

any  of  the  above  named  societies.  If  they  have 
joined,  they  must  withdraw.  Should  Catholics 
who  are  Masons  present  themselves  for  confession, 
they  are  to  be  refused  absolution  unless  they  with- 
draw. Membership  in  the  other  three  societies 
named  in  1894,  must  also  be  given  up,  except  in 
certain  cases  when  nominal  membership  may  be 
retained  on  specified  conditions.1 

The  Canon  Law  states  that  the  faithful  are  to 
be  warned  not  to  marry  those  who  are  members  of 
societies  condemned  by  the  Church.  Nor  may  a 
parish  priest  assist  at  any  such  marriage,  without 
having  first  consulted  the  Ordinary,  who  will  re- 
quire an  assurance  that  proper  care  is  to  be  given 
to  the  Christian  education  of  the  children  and  that 
there  is  no  proximate  danger  of  perversion.  Chris- 
tian burial  is  to  be  refused  to  those  who  are  com- 

*A  decree  issued  on  January  18,  1896,  allows  a nominal  member- 
ship in  these  three  societies,  if  in  the  judgment  of  the  Apostolic  Dele- 
gate four  conditions  are  fulfilled:  1,  That  the  society  was  entered  in 

good  faith.  2,  That  there  be  no  danger  of  scandal.  3,  That  grave  tem- 
poral injury  would  result  from  withdrawal.  4,  That  there  be  no  dan- 
ger of  perversion.  To  these  provisions,  the  Delegate  generally  adds 
these  others, — that  the  member  shall  promise  not  to  attend  meetings 
or  frequent  the  lodge-rooms,  that  he  shall  send  his  dues  only  by  mail 
or  by  a third  party,  and  that  in  case  of  death,  the  society  shall  have 
nothing  to  do  with  the  funeral. 

On  June  27,  1913,  the  Holy  See  extended  this  faculty  of  the  Apos- 
tolic Delegate  to  each  of  the  Provinces  of  the  United  States.  This 
faculty  is  for  all  the  Dioceses  of  the  Province.  The  conditions  for 
nominal  membership  remain  the  same.  (Cf.  John  J.  Graham,  Doc- 
trine of  the  Church  on  Secret  Societies , p.  11.) 


WHY  BLAME  THE  MASONS? 


tnonly  known  to  have  been  members  of  forbidden 
societies  at  the  time  of  death. 

This  does  indeed,  look  like  rather  drastic  legis- 
lation. It  leaves  no  doubt  of  the  Church’s  hostility 
toward  Freemasonry.  And  the  innocent  bystander 
is  raising  a pertinent  question  when  he  asks,  “Who 
started  it  all?” 

Why  Is  Masonry  Condemned? 

This  question  is  actually  on  the  lips  of  many 
Catholics,  as  well  as  of  many  non-Catholics.  And 
some  of  these  questioners  do  more  than  merely  sub- 
mit a request  for  information.  They  make  indig- 
nant protest  against  the  action  of  the  Church, — 
frequently  in  words  like  these: 

“How  can  the  Catholic  Church  offer  a valid 
excuse  for  such  fierce  hostility  to  the  Masons? 
There  is  nothing  in  Masonry  to  offend  the  religious 
sense.  Masonic  assemblies  give  the  Bible  a place 
of  honor;  they  invoke  the  Creator  with  respect. 
Masons  support  many  charities  of  their  own  and 
subscribe  generously  to  the  religious  and  philan- 
thropic works  of  others.  They  often  respond  gen- 
erously to  Catholic  appeals.  Their  organization  is 
a distinct  benefit  to  the  Community.  Masons  of 
high  degree  affirm  that  in  Masonic  assemblies  they 
have  never  heard  a single  word  spoken  against 
either  religion  or  social  order.” 


WHY  BLAME  THE  MASONS? 


If  these  statements  are  true,  it  does  seem  at 
first  sight  rather  strange  that  Masonry  should  be 
so  strongly  condemned  by  the  Catholic  Church. 
Are  they  true? 

Well,  yes, — at  least  in  part.  Some  of  them  are 
quite  obviously  true,  at  certain  times  and  in  cer- 
tain places.  Large  numbers  of  Masons,  especially 
in  the  English-speaking  countries  show 

No  Antagonism 

toward  the  Christian  religion  or  the  Catholic 
Church.  They  are  honorable  men  and  good  citi- 
zens, who  have  joined  the  Masons  mainly  for  so- 
cial or  business  reasons.  They  vigorously  resist 
the  effort  of  Masonic  leaders  to  enroll  Masonry 
in  the  campaign  against  parochial  schools  and  in 
similar  crusades.  It  is  with  perfect  sincerity  that 
these  men  resent  the  attitude  of  the  Church  to- 
ward their  organization. 

But  Catholic  writers  claim  that  these  friendly 
and  benevolent  Masons  are  usually  not  at  all  in- 
terested in  the  fundamental  principles  of  Masonry. 
They  are  not  familiar  with  its  history,  and  as  a 
rule,  they  do  not  read  the  publications  which  in- 
terpret Masonic  ideals.  That  helps  to  explain  why 
the  average  good-natured  American  Mason  cannot 
for  the  life  of  him  understand  the  Church’s  con- 
demnation of  his  order. 


— 8 


WHY  BLAME  THE  MASONS? 


He  Does  Not  Know  the  Facts 

An  example  is  cited  by  Father  Malloy: 

“In  a friendly  discussion  with  a man  who  was 
Past  Master  of  a Lodge  in  New  York  and  who 
had  been  a member  of  the  Grand  Lodge  of  the 
State,  I called  attention  to  some  particularly 

Violent  Attacks 

on  the  Catholic  Church  and  on  religion  in  general, 
that  had  appeared  in  The  New  Age  and  in  other 
Masonic  publications.  He  was  fair  enough  to  say 
when  he  had  verified  my  quotations,  that  what  he 
read, — I quote  him  exactly, — ‘gave  me  quite  a 
shock,  for  I had  not  dreamed  that  any  Mason  or 
body  of  Masons,  or  any  publication  concerning 
Masonry  in  the  United  States  of  America  had  ever 
been  guilty  of  the  sentiments  mentioned.’  He  had 
been  of  the  opinion,  as  so  many  others  are,  that 
the  Catholic  Church  was  narrow  because  she 
would  not  permit  her  members  to  become  Masons, 
and  that  the  Church  entirely  misunderstood 
Masonry.  The  fact  is  that  it  is  Masons,  many  hun- 
dreds of  them,  who  misunderstand  Masonry.”2 
This  sounds  interesting.  Apparently  the  Cath- 
olic Church  claims  that  she  is  only  defending  her- 
self against  Masonic  attacks.  It  would  be  a grim 

2May  Catholics  he  Masons?  by  Rev.  Joseph  I.  Malloy,  C.S.P. 
(The  Paulist  Press,  N.  Y.) 


— 9 — 


WHY  BLAME  THE  MASONS? 


sort  of  jest,  should  the  protesting  Masons  prove  to 
be  the  first  aggressors.  If,  under  a program  of 
benevolence,  or  behind  a smoke-screen  of  good 
citizenship,  Masonic  leaders  have  been  secretly 
using  their  organization  in  a systematic  campaign 
against  the  Catholic  Church,  then  every  right- 
minded  man  will,  of  course,  be  glad  to  see  a “show- 
down.” The  American  spirit  would  commend 
rather  than  blame  the  Catholic  Church  for  coming 
out  with  an  open  declaration  that  men  must  choose 
one  side  or  the  other,  and  that  she  will  never  recog- 
nize as  a loyal  Catholic  a man  who  wants  to  be 

On  Both  Sides  At  Once 

So  we  come  back  again  to  the  still  unanswered 
question,  “Who  started  the  row?”  Let  us  try  to 
get  the  answer.  The  complaint  of  the  Masons  has 
already  been  heard.  What  has  the  Catholic  Church 
to  say  on  the  other  side? 

Representatives  of  the  Catholic  side  of  the  con- 
troversy are  not  lacking. 

Father  Gruber,  who  wrote  on  Masonry  at  con- 
siderable length  in  the  Catholic  Encyclopedia  and 
elsewhere,  has  been  praised  for  his  thoroughness 
and  accuracy  by  numerous  Masonic  writers. 

Father  Thurston,  author  of  the  Catholic  Truth 
Society  pamphlet  Freemasonry,  has  an  enviable 
reputation  on  both  sides  of  the  Atlantic  as  an  un- 
usually competent  historical  critic. 

— 10  — 


WHY  BLAME  THE  MASONS? 


Mr.  Arthur  Preuss,  who  published  the  good 
sized  volume,  A Study  in  American  Freemasonry, 
drew  from^  Masonic  reviewer  the  comment,  “It  is 
written  in  a calm  argumentative  manner,  giving 
authorities  for  all  the  allegations  the  author 
makes.” 

Dr.  Cooper  of  the  Catholic  University  at  Wash- 
ington, who  wrote  a series  of  articles  on  Masonry 
in  the  Ecclesiastical  Review,  had  access  to  several 
thousand  volumes  of  Masonic  literature, — and  his 
strictly  scientific  temper  is  a matter  of  common 
knowledge. 

Among  the  other  writers  are  Father  Michael 
Kenny,  author  of  American  Masonry  and  Catholic 
Education,  Father  Malloy,  May  Catholics  be 
Masons?  and  Father  Lucian  Johnston. 

From  these  sources,  available  to  everyone,  it 
is  easy  to  learn  the  Catholic  side  of  the  case.  Let 
us  review  the  chief  points  submitted  for  considera- 
tion. 

The  Fundamental  Objection 

of  the  Catholic  writers  is  that  Masonry  tends  to 
become  a rival  religion  of  Christianity.  It  is  a 
sort  of  organized  unsectarianism,  presenting  a 
philosophy  of  life,  possessing  temples,  altars  and  a 
ritual,  teaching  a creed  and  a moral  code.  In  its 
early  stages,  it  was  largely  inspired  by  the  rational- 


— n — 


WHY  BLAME  THE  MASONS? 


ism  of  the  day;  and  it  professed  to  represent  a 
sort  of  primitive  religion  in  which  all  men  agree, — 
a marked  contrast  to  the  Catholic  idea  df  Christian 
revelation.  This  was  the  chief  ground  on  which 
it  was  condemned  in  1738  and  still  remains  an  ob- 
jection,— especially,  since  the  intervening  years 
show  that  apostasy  has  often  followed  hard  upon 
entrance  into  a Masonic  lodge.  To  the  point  is  a 
statement  by  Preuss: 

“And  here,  as  the  eye  of  a Catholic  priest  roams 
over  these  pages,  let  him  realize  more  fully,  why  it 
is  so  difficult,  even  on  a death-bed,  to  reclaim  a 
Catholic  who  has  been  a Mason.  The  difficulty  is 
not  a mere  moral  one,  it  is  an  intellectual  one.  It 
is  not  merely  a disobedience  to  the  Church  and  the 
neglect  of  her  sacraments;  it  is  a complete  and 
formal  apostasy  from  the  faith,  in  which  the  very 
nature  and  essence  of  the  Christian  God  is  denied, 
as  well  as  the  nature  and  essence  of  the  Christian 
soul.  What  is  there  to  work  on?  Without  a 
miracle  of  grace, — nothing.  Were  it  mere  passion, 
or  interest,  or  worldly  motives  that  had  led  the 
heart  astray  but  had  left  at  least  the  roots  of 
faith;  had  there  been  only  ‘a  change’  and  not  ‘a 
total  extinction  of  the  past,’  the  nearness  of  eter- 
nity and  the  fear  of  an  offended  God  might  revive 
what  had  long  lain  dormant  and  as  dead.  But 
when  the  very  roots  of  faith  have  been  plucked 
up,  and  every  religious  and  moral  tie  has  been 

— 12  — 


WHY  BLAME  THE  MASONS? 


broken ; when  the  great  intellectual  transformation 
of  Masonry  has  been  wrought,  and  not  one  single 
dogma  repudiated  but  the  whole  Catholic  system 
rejected  as  error,  helplessness,  and  ignorance,  the 
case  is,  as  Masonry  knows,  and  as  it  has  cunningly 
planned,  well  nigh  hopeless.”3 

The  Second  Objection 

The  original  condemnation  of  1738  denounced 
the  Masonic  oath  as  immoral  in  principle.  Cath- 
olics aver  that  such  an  oath  is  equivalent  to  a blind 
acceptance  of  anything  and  everything  which  may 
be  imposed.  Despite  protests  to  the  contrary,  it 
involves  an  unwarranted  surrender  of  the  indi- 
vidual conscience  into  the  hands  of  unknown  and 
possibly  unprincipled  superiors.  As  history  shows, 
it  easily  lends  itself  to  grave  abuse. 

Other  Objections 

Another  reason  for  the  Catholic  attitude  is 
found  in  the  injuries  actually  inflicted  on  the 
Church  by  organized  Masonry.  So  far  as  the  for- 

3 A Study  in  American  Freemasonry , p.  78. 

A recent  writer  in  The  Week  of  Calcutta  thus  summarizes  the  main 
objections  to  Freemasonry: 

1.  It  promotes  indifferentism,  making  all  religions  meet  on  the 
plane  of  highly  vaporized  Deism. 

2.  It  treats  the  Bible,  Prayer  and  Religious  Ritual  as  empty  formu- 
las and  stage  effects. 

3.  Most  important,  it  benumbs  the  instinctive  yearning  of  the  soul 
for  true  religion  and  in  the  end  destroys  it  altogether. 

— 13  — 


♦ 


WHY  BLAME  THE  MASONS? 


eign  countries  are  concerned,  the  situation  is  too 
well-known  to  need  description.  Latin  Masonry 
has  violently  attacked  the  Church  wherever  and 
whenever  possible.  It  achieved  the  confiscation  of 
Church  property  and  the  enactment  of  anti-Cath- 
olic  legislation  in  Italy,  France  and  Portugal.  The 
Grand  Orient  boasts  that  recent  anti-Catholic  agi- 
tations in  Spain,  Mexico,  South  America  and  the 
Philippines  were  the  work  of  Masons.  In  a word, 
Latin  Masonry  has  practically  proclaimed  war  on 
the  Catholic  Church.  Father  Thurston  quotes  an 
item  that  appeared  in  the  New  York  Times  of 
February  23,  1913: 

“The  aim  of  the  Grand  Orient  is  to  destroy  all 
religion  beginning,  of  course,  by  crushing  Roman 
Catholicism  in  France,  to  overturn  all  thrones  hos- 
tile to  its  designs  and  to  establish  a world-wide  re- 
public, but  a republic  of  which  its  own  high-priests 
are  to  be  the  dictators.”4 

The  same  author  quotes  from  a speech  of  M. 
Delpech,  member  of  the  French  Senate  and  Presi- 
dent of  the  Grand  Orient  of  France. 

“The  triumph  of  the  Galilean  has  lasted  twenty 
centuries;  but  now  his  day  is  over.  The  mysteri- 
ous voice  which  once  announced  the  death  of  Pan, 

4“That  these  aims  have  not  in  any  way  altered  since  the  war  is 
proved  by  a remarkable  compilation  of  the  published  utterances  of 
representative  Masons  extracted  from  the  official  reports  of  the  Con- 
gresses and  Conventions  of  the1  Craft,  which  has  been  recently  given 
to  the  world  by  A.  G.  Michel  under  the  title  of  ‘La  Dictature  de  la 
Franc-Magonnerie  sur  la  France.*  ” ( Freemasonry , p.  23.) 

— 14  — 


WHY  BLAME  THE  MASONS? 


today  announces  the  downfall  of  the  impostor  God 
who  promised  an  era  of  justice  and  peace  to  those 
who  believed  in  him.  The  illusion  has  persisted 
far  too  long.  This  faithless  God  now  gives  place 
in  his  turn.  He  passes  from  the  scene  to  join  in 
the  dust  of  ages  his  fellow  deities  of  India,  Egypt, 
Greece,  and  Rome  who  saw  so  many  deluded  wor- 
shipers prostrate  before  their  altars.  . . . Brother 
Masons,  we  rejoice  to  state  that  we  are  not  with- 
out our  share  in  this  overthrow  of  the  false 
prophets.  The  Roman  Church  founded  on  the 
Galilean  myth  began  to  decay  rapidly  from  the 
very  day  on  which  organized  Masonry  was  first 
established.”5 

Father  Thurston  makes  the  following  com- 
ment: 

“That  the  Popes  have  good  reason  for  banning 
a Freemasonry  animated  with  such  a spirit  as 
these  words  imply,  will  hardly  be  disputed  by  any- 
one; and  this,  be  it  noted,  is  the  only  form  of 
Masonry  with  which  they  are  in  immediate  con- 
tact. The  Nathans,  the  Lemmis,  and  the  Margi- 
ottas  of  the  days  of  Leo  XIII  used  the  same  kind 
of  language.”6 

It  is  true,  as  Father  Cooper  points  out,  that  the 
policy  of  Latin  Masonry  would  not  be  tolerated  an 

r,Speech  ol  M.  Deipech  on  September  20,  1902.  reported  in  the 
Compte  Rendu  du  Grand  Orient  de  France , p.  381 

6Rev.  Herbert  Thurston,  S.J.,  Freemasonry , p.  25. 


— 15  — 


WHY  BLAME  THE  MASONS? 


instant  by  the  great  bulk  of  the  American  Masonic 
fraternity.  It  is  equally  true,  however,  that  con- 
stant efforts  are  being  made  to  tighten  the  bonds 
between  American  and  European  Masonry.  The 
two  following  statements  can  hardly  be  ques- 
tioned: 

1 . Despite  excommunications  and  schism  with- 
in the  Order,  there  does  exist  a certain  degree  of 
unity  and  of  fellowship  among  Masons  all  over  the 
world.7 

2.  The  ultimate  aims  of  organized  Masonry 
are  kept  secret  not  only  from  the  outside  world, 
but  also  from  a great  multitude  of  the  Masonic 
brethren,  and  care  is  taken  to  deceive  the  members 
in  the  lower  degrees.  Now  in  America  is  it  pre- 
cisely those  admitted  to  the  higher  degrees  who 
have  been  most  violent  in  their  attacks  on  the 
Catholic  Church. 

One  writer  states,  “It  is  significant  that 

Every  Anti-Catholic  Association 

whether  A.  P.  A.,  Guardians  of  Liberty,  Knights  of 
Luther,  The  Menace  and  Watsonian  dark  brother- 
hoods, is  invariaby  manned  by  Masons  ...  The 
New  Age  of  Washington,  the  official  organ  of  the 

7The  right  of  visit  is  one  of  the  most  important  of  all  Masonic 
privileges  because  it  is  based  on  the  principle  of  the  identity  of  Ma- 
sonic Institutions  as  one  universal  family  . . . — Encyclopedia  of  Free- 
masonry; article,  “Visit,  Right  of.” 

— 16  — 


WHY  BLAME  THE  MASONS? 


Supreme  Council  of  the  Scottish  Rite  33rd  degree, 
has  been  and  is  as  virulent  and  brazenly  menda- 
cious as  The  Menace,  and  as  urgent  for  the  destruc- 
tion of  Catholicism  here  as  is  the  Grand  Orient  in 
France.  There  in  the  seat  of  our  National  Gov- 
ernment, where  there  are  thirty  lodges  of  10,000 
members  and  where  in  every  Government  depart- 
ment they  have  besides  established  a special 
Masonic  Club,  this  supreme  organ,  which  is  cir- 
culated in  every  lodge  in  the  land  and  gives  the 
keynote  to  the  forty  minor  organs,  is  not  only  vili- 
fying the  Catholic  Church  in  every  number,  but  is 
demanding  its  destruction  as  insistently  as  the 
Grand  Orients  of  Portugal  and  France.”8 

Before  going  further,  it  may  be  well  to  say  a 
word  or  two  about  the  organization  of 

Masonry  in  America 

where  about  three-fourths  of  all  the  Masons  in  the 
world  reside.  The  World  Almanac  of  1928  gives 
the  number  of  Masons  in  the  United  States  as 
3,212,000.  All  of  these  are  members  of  the  Blue 
Lodge  System,  which  comprises  the  first  three  de- 
grees; and  the  majority  of  American  Masons  go 
no  further.  Those  who  do  advance  are  divided  be- 
tween the  American  York  Rite,  (of  seven  degrees), 

8Rev.  Michael  Kenny,  S.J.,  American  Masonry  and  Catholic  Edu- 
cation, p.  12. 


— 17 


WHY  BLAME  THE  MASONS? 


and  the  Scottish  Rite,  (of  thirty  degrees).  It  is 
calculated  that  perhaps  25  per  cent  of  American 
Masons  belong  to  the  York  Rite  and  something  like 
10  per  cent  to  the  Scottish  Rite.9 

The  Catholic  writers  already  named,  quote 
abundantly  from  standard  Masonic  works, — a fair 
way  of  manifesting  the  true  spirit  of  American 
Masonry.10 

Mr.  Arthur  Preuss,  who  has  made  an  elaborate 
study  of  Mackey’s  writings,  cites  them  to  prove 
that  Masonry  is  a religion,  and  a religion  incom- 
patible with  Christianity. 


9The  thirty-third  and  last  degree  is  a badge  of  distinguished  serv- 
ice. The  number  of  active  “thirty-thirds”  is  said  to  be  not  more  than 
75,  although  their  honorary  associates  number  perhaps  2,000.  The 
Mystic  Shrine,  although  open  only  to  thirty-second  degree  Masons,  is 
a purely  social  organization  and  not  an  integral  part  of  the  Masonic 
system. 

10The  chief  authors  quoted  are: 

Albert  G.  Mackey,  author  of  an  Encyclopedia  of  Freemasonry,  and 
of  other  standard  works.  He  is  said  to  have  contributed  to  the  litera- 
ture of  Freemasonry  more  extensively  than  any  other  man  in  this 
country  or  Europe. 

Albert  Pike,  author  of  the  Morals  and  Dogma  of  the  Ancient  and 
Accepted  Scottish  Rite , etc.  He  was  called  the  “Prophet  of  Free- 
masonry” and  “the  greatest  Freemason  of  the  nineteenth  century,” 
and  was  an  honorary  member  of  almost  every  Supreme  Council  in  the 
world. 

Commander  Richardson,  author  of  a famous  Allocution  promul- 
gated in  1913.  He  succeeded  Pike  as  the  Sovereign  Grand  Com- 
mander of  the  Southern  Supreme  Council,  Ancient  and  Accepted  Scot- 
tish Rite. 

J.  D.  Buck  and  Thomas  M.  Stewart,  authors  respectively  of  The 
Genius  of  Freemasonry  and  of  Symbolic  Teachings — two  of  the  Ma- 
sonic bestsellers.  They  popularized  the  more  extensive  works  of  Pike 
and  are  advertised  very  generally  in  Masonic  publications,  as  well  as 
in  magazines  of  the  type  of  The  Menace. 


— 18  — 


WHY  BLAME  THE  MASONS? 


Passages  quoted  from  other  writers  show 

Unmistakable  Antagonism 

to  the  Catholic  Church.  For  example: 

Pike  says,  “Neither  of  our  political  factions, 
Democratic  or  Republican,  dares  to  resist  the 
Roman  Church’s  encroachments  or  warn  the  peo- 
ple of  its  insidious  influences,  which  are  inces- 
santly making  rotten  the  foundations  of  our  free 
government.” 

Richardson  appeals  to  all  Masons  to  array 
themselves  with  the  members  of  every  Protestant 
church  and  with  all  patriotic  Americans  “as  one 
band  of  brothers  against  the  avowed  purposes  of 
the  Hierarchy  of  Rome.” 

Buck  says  of  the  Catholic  Church,  “Her  reli- 
gion is  as  immoral  as  her  politics  are  irreligious 
and  devilish.” 

Stewart  says  the  Catholic  Schools  are  “the 
breeding  ground  of  convicts  and  traitors,  nurseries 
of  treason  under  the  cloak  of  religion.” 

In  addition  to  the  above  quotations,  Catholic 
writers  cite  also  The  New  Age  of  Washington,  of- 
ficial organ  of  the  Scottish  Rite,  and  The  American 
Freemason,  organ  of  the  Blue  Lodges.  The  matter 
may  be  summarized  by  saying  that  The  New  Age 
habitually  abuses  the  Papacy,  the  Catholic  hier- 
archy, the  priesthood  and  many  beliefs  sacred  to 
Catholics.  It  has  proclaimed  that  “Masonry  is 


— 19  — 


WHY  BLAME  THE  MASONS? 


more  than  a religion;  it  is  Religion,”  and  that 
“Masonry  is  the  mother  church.” 

The  American  Freemason  regards  the  alliance 
of  Masonry  with  The  Menace  as  unfortunate, 
and  views  with  regret  “eruptions  of  blackguard- 
ism.” The  editor,  however,  has  no  illusions  with 
regard  to  the  actual  relationship  of  the  Church 
and  Masonry.  Here  is  his  editorial  statement: 
“This  magazine  has  never  swerved  from  the 
position  that  between  the  Masonic  fraternity  and 
the  Catholic  Church  there  is  an  antagonism  in- 
herent to  the  nature  of  the  organizations:  the  one 
seeking  to  broadcast  liberty  of  thought  and  the 
other  striving  to  stifle  all  revolt  against  the  self- 
constituted  authority  that  would  hold  mind  and 
soul  in  thraldom.  We  have  declared  that  there  can 
be  no  peace  nor  even  truce  between  Freemasonry 
and  the  official  Roman  Church.” 

The  Fellowship  Forum,  though  not  officially  a 
Masonic  organ,  is  edited  by  Mr.  George  Fleming 
Moore,  who  was  Grand  Commander  of  the 
Supreme  Council  of  the  Scottish  Rite  in  1921, 
when  he  helped  to  found  the  magazine  just  named. 
Its  chief  activities  seem  to  be  to  support  the 
Masons  and  to  attack  the  Catholic  Church. 

The  Above 

is  an  outline  of  the  Catholic  side  of  the  case. 


— 20— 


WHY  BLAME  THE  MASONS? 


All  in  all,  it  seems  to  justify  the  opinion  of  the 
Protestant  editor  who  wrote: 

“The  anti-Catholic  attitude  taken  by  Masonic 
lodges  generally,  and  especially  in  their  official 
organs,  such  as  The  New  Age,  forces  Catholics  to 
view  Masonry  with  suspicion  and  distrust,  if  not 
prejudice.” 

“The  very  nature  of  Freemasonry,  and  espe- 
cially its  anti-Catholic  proclivities,  places  the  Cath- 
olic Church  in  a position  where  it  must  oppose  the 
great  secret  order  to  be  consistent  with  its  teach- 
ings.”11 

In  connection  with  the  opinion  expressed  by  the 
non-Catholic,  Windle,  it  may  be  noted  that  the 
Church  has  not  been  the  only  enemy  of  Free- 
masonry, in  this  country.  Just  a century  ago,  there 
was  a violent  reaction  against  the  activities  of 

The  Invisible  Empire 

which  had  begun  to  make  its  influence  felt  in  Amer- 
ican life.  John  Quincy  Adams,  sixth  President  of 
the  United  States,  in  1833  wrote:  “I  do  con- 
scientiously and  sincerely  believe  that  the  Order 
of  Freemasonry,  if  not  the  greatest,  is  one  of  the 
greatest  moral  and  political  evils  under  which  this 
Union  is  now  laboring.” 

Theodore  Graebner,  a Lutheran  Minister,  has 
written:  “Yet  we  should  not  permit  the  more  sin- 

X1C.  A.  Windle,  Truth  and  Light,  July,  1926,  p.  24. 

— 21  — 


WHY  BLAME  THE  MASONS? 


ister  aspect  of  the  lodge  system  to  escape  us,  its 
significance  as  a secret  empire,  binding  its  mem- 
bers to  an  alliance  which  has  no  precedent  of  justi- 
fication in  human  history,  which  is  not  only  a con- 
stant potential  menace  to  the  fundamental  safe- 
guards of  citizenship  and  is  the  very  antithesis  of 
the  American  ideal  of  the  square  deal,  but  which 
has  left  its  trail  on  the  administration  of  our  courts, 
sparing  neither  the  bench  nor  the  jury-box.”12 

Readers  may  recall  that,  during  the  World  War, 

General  Resentment 

was  occasioned  in  this  country  because  American 
citizens  quite  commonly  felt  that  all  non-Masons 
in  the  United  States  service  were  discriminated 
against;  and  this  sentiment  was  strengthened  by 
the  memory  of  the  famous  “Affaire  des  Fiches”  of 
1905,  when  the  French  Army  and  the  French  Gov- 
ernment were  shown  to  be  practically  under  the 
control  of  a small  well-organized  minority  made  up 
of  Masons.13 

12The  Secret  Empire,  p.  viii. 

13“  ‘Any  officer  who  was  known  to  cherish  religious  convictions, 
whose  children  were  being  educated  in  a denominational  school,  or 
whose  wife  attended  Mass,  was  made  the  subject  of  an  index-slip 
drawn  up  by  the  local  Masonic  lodge  and  confidentially  despatched  to 
the  War  Office,  at  that  time  almost  entirely  staffed  by  Freemasons. 
These  slips  were  then  collected  and  formed  a register,  which  popularly 
went  by  the  nickname  of  “Carthage,”  an  allusion  of  the  famous 
delenda  est  Carthago  of  Cato.  Such  unfortunate  officers  as  had  the 
ill-luck  to  figure  in  this  black  book  might  say  good-bye  to  all  hope  of 
promotion,  no  matter  what  their  military  capacity.*  (Cf.  Free- 
masonry, p.  22.) 

“The  same  sort  of  pressure  was  applied  to  civilians  and  to  every 
— 22  — 


WHY  BLAME  THE  MASONS? 


A somewhat  similar,  though  less  acute  feeling 
was  awakened  more  recently,  when  the  Fellow- 
ship Forum  appealed  publicly  to  sixty-seven 
Masons  in  the  United  States  Senate — in  virtue  of 
their  solemn  obligations  as  Freemasons — to  vote 
against  an  administration  measure  in  order  to  pro- 
tect Italian  Masons  from  persecution  at  the  hands 
of  Mussolini. 

The  preceding  pages  present  a brief  and  very 
incomplete  summary  of  the  testimony  adduced  by 
Catholic  writers.  It  will  however,  serve  to  place 
the  reader  in  a position  to  give  a verdict.  Setting 
aside,  for  the  time  being,  all  questions  of  the  in- 
trinsic merits  of  the  disputants,  he  can  at  least  de- 
termine who  is  responsible  for  the  irreconcilable 
antagonism  between  the  Catholic  Church  and 
Masonry. 


Are  the  Masons  to  Blame? 

To  answer  “No,”  would  be  to  censure  the 
Catholic  Church  for  having  recognized  a fact  which 

kind  of  civil  functionary,  but  this  interference  with  the  army  touched 
French  public  opinion  in  its  tenderest  point.  None  the  less  in  1912 
and  1913,  just  before  the  war,  Freemasonry  still  maintained  a strangle- 
hold upon  French  political  life.  At  that  period  in  a population  of 
roughly  40  millions,  the  Grand  Orient  of  France,  and  the  Grand 
Lodge  combined,  claimed  only  a membership  of  36,000  Masons.  Yet 
in  the  Chamber  300  deputies  out  of  a total  of  580,  and  in  the  Senate 
180  senators  out  of  300,  were  members  of  Masonic  organizations. 
They  thus  had  an  absolute  majority  in  both  departments  of  the  legis- 
lature. Surely  this  fact  alone  is  of  supreme  significance.  The  Masons 
formed  less  than  one  in  a thousand  of  the  total  population,  but  yet 
they  ruled  the  country  and  their  rule  was  a reign  of  terror.” 

— 23  — 


WHY  BLAME  THE  MASONS? 


is  notorious,  namely  that  in  principle  and  in  deed 
Masonry  is  opposed  to  Catholicism.  The  average 
American  will  not  blame  the  Church  for  doing 
that.  Once  he  has  learned  the  facts,  he  will  say 
that  the  Catholic  Church  has  done  only  what  it 
had  a perfect  right  to  do,  according  to  the  uni- 
versally recognized  right  of  self-defense  and  the 
American  standard  of  fair  play.  To  the  Catholic 
Church  such  a verdict  will  be  eminently  satis- 
factory. 


The  frankest  book  on  the  noble  and  ignoble  possi- 
bilities  of  sex  that  has  ever  come  from  the  pen  of  an 
authoritative  Catholic  writer . A forceful,  brief  yet 
comprehensive  discussion  of  the  dangers  of  sex- 
promiscuity,  informative  chapters  on  Birth-Control, 
Divorce,  Annulment  and  Separation.  A sane, 
practical,  illuminating  book  by 


Rev.  Martin  J.  Scott,  s.j. 


WHAT  does  it  all  mean?  Birth-control,  divorce,  modern 
paganism  with  its  worship  of  self  and  denial  of  the  soul  . . . 
its  exterior  of  Christian  culture,  and  heart  of  heathenism 
teaching  that  the  body  is  supreme  . . . uncontrolled  passion 
with  its  resultant  disquiet,  dissatisfaction,  wretchedness 
and  despair  . . . broken  homes,  broken  hearts  and  callous 
children? 

WHAT  is  the  reason  for  this  debasement  of  moral  stand- 
ard and  conduct?  Father  Scott  in  his  new  book  goes 
straight  to  the  true  facts;  gives  an  unflinching  condemna- 
tion of  modern  sexual  vices  and  proves  that  true  Catholic 
marriage  promotes  the  happiness  and  welfare  of  the  indi- 
vidual, the  family  and  society. 

Cloth  bound  $1.00  Paper  50c 


Published  by 

The  Paulist  Press  401  West  59th  Street 


New  York,  N.  Y. 


Paulist 

Pamphlets 

Doctrine  — Morals 
Devotion 

Biography  - The  Saints 
— Miscellaneous 
Scripture  — Fiction 


5c  each,  $3.50  per  100, 
$30.00  per  1,000 

All  orders  for  less  than 
$5.00  MUST  be  accom- 
panied by  remittance 

Carriage  Extra  On  All 
Orders 

The  Paulist  Press 

401  West  69th  Street 
New  York 


« • 


# 


Assortment 


CREDO. 

Mother  Loyola. 

BE  FAIR! 

Rev.  James  M.  Gillis,  C.S.P. 

HOLY  MASS. 

Mother  Loyola. 

HOLY  COMMUNION. 

Msgr.  de  Sdgur. 

CATHOLIC  SCHOOLS. 

Rev.  Michael,  J.  Larkin,  D.D. 

DO  THE  DfiAD  LIVE? 

Rev.  Joseph  McSorley,  C.S.P. 

THE  DIRECT  ROUTE. 

Rt.  Rev.  Francis  Kelley,  D.D. 

WHY  I AM  A CATHOLIC . 

Rev.  Joseph  McSorley,  C.S.P. 

CATHOLICS  AND  DIVORCE. 

Rev.  Herbert  Thurston,  S.J. 

WHOM  GOD  HATH  JOINED. 

Rev.  J.  Elliot  Ross. 

PENANCE  AND  FASTING. 

Rev.  P.  Hallett,  B.A. 

“COM PA  NIONA  TE  MARRIA  GE.” 

Kathleen  Norris. 

RELIGION  AND  CITIZENSHIP. 

Rt.  Rev.  John  J.  Dunn,  D.D. 

THE  MYSTERY  OF  SUFFERING. 

Rev.  Walter  Elliott,  C.S.P. 

EVOLUTION  AND  CATHOLICITY. 

Sir  Bertram  C.  A.  Windle,  LL.D. 

TALKS  WITH  LITTLE  CHILDREN. 

Rev.  M.  D.  Forrest,  M.S.C. 

PRAYERS  TO  THE  SACRED  HEART. 
Approved  Sources. 

IS  ONE  CHURCH  AS  GOOD  AS  ANOTHER ? 

V.  Rev.  John  B.  Harney,  C.S.P. 

THE  * CATHOLIC  AS  I 

apostle.  ...... 

Rev.  Walter  Elliott,  C.S.P. 

WHAT  THE  CATHOLIC  CHURCH  IS  AND 
WHAT  SHE  TEACHES. 

Rev.  E.  R.  Hull,  S.J. 


IV ell  Trinted 

^Attractively  ^Presented 


